Climate Change and the Midwest
Senate briefing on “Climate Change and the Midwest,” a discussion of the impacts of climate change on Midwestern states.
Panelists Include:- Dr. Donald Wuebbles, Director of the School of Earth, Society, and Environment at the University of Illinois, who will summarize the potential impacts of global warming on the Midwestern states. Dr. Wuebbles developed the concept of Ozone Depletion Potentials used in the Montreal Protocol and the U.S. Clean Air Act. He contributed to all of the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) assessments on climate change, and coauthored both an assessment of the impacts of climate change on the Great Lakes region and, more recently, a similar assessment of the U.S. Northeast.
- Dr. Jonathan Pershing, Director of WRI’s Climate, Energy and Pollution Program, who will focus on how proposed federal legislation might be tailored to address Midwest-specific concerns through allowance allocation or complementary policies, including policy options that can mitigate economic impacts of a federal program. Dr. Pershing is active in U.S. and international climate policy design; he serves on the CA Market Advisory Committee, was the facilitator for both the Northeast states’ emissions trading initiative (RGGI) and the Illinois state climate advisory group, is a regular participant in international UN climate negotiations, and was a lead author for the IPCC.
- Doug Scott, Director of the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency, who will present a summary of the actions taken to date by Midwestern states to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Mr. Scott chairs Governor Blagojevich’s Climate Change Advisory Committee.
If you have any questions, please contact Senator Klobuchar’s office or Senator Lugar’s office.
Curbing Soaring Aviation Emissions
On Wednesday, April 2, 2008, Chairman Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) and the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming is holding a hearing titled, “From the Wright Brothers to the Right Solutions: Curbing Soaring Aviation Emissions.” The hearing will take place on April 2, 2008 at 1:30 p.m. in Room 1310 of the Longworth House Office Building. Witnesses will be by invitation only.
At this hearing the Committee will also vote to subpoena documents from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) showing what progress that agency has made in response to Supreme Court decision, Massachusetts v. EPA, which was delivered April 2, 2007.
As Congress examines all causes and impacts of heat-trapping emissions, the Select Committee is assessing aviation’s present contribution to greenhouse gasses and the potential to curb such emissions in the future. Aviation emissions generate 12 percent of U.S. transportation carbon dioxide emissions and three percent of the United States’ total carbon dioxide emissions. The FAA estimates that demand for passenger and cargo aviation in the United States will double or triple by 2025. As the European Union is poised to extend its Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) to all airlines, it is imperative for Congress to consider how aviation can contribute to or curb heat-trapping emissions through operations, technology and fuel.
Witnesses- Dan Elwell, FAA Assistant Administrator for Aviation Policy, Planning, and Environment
- Bob Meyers, Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator for the Office of Air and Radiation, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
- Tom Windmuller, Senior Vice President, International Air Transport Association
- James May, President and CEO, Air Transport Association
Solar Radiation, Cosmic Rays and Greenhouse Gases: What's Driving Global Warming?
What are the relative contributions from the sun, cosmic rays, and greenhouse gases, to the observed warming in the late 20th century and what are their expected contributions during the 21st Century? How does this compare to natural climate variability of past centuries and millennia? What is the principle driver or drivers of global warming in the 20th and 21st centuries? How are cosmic rays different from solar irradiance? Are there direct measurements of solar irradiance changes over the last 30 years or so? If so, what do these measurements show? What are the signals of this solar variability in the Earth’s atmosphere, and how do climate models reproduce these? Are we likely to observe additional changes in solar irradiance in the future and what might such variability have as an effect on climate? How is the ozone layer affected by solar activity changes and how does it influence surface weather and climate?
Public Invited
Buffet Reception Following
Moderator:
- Dr. Anthony Socci, Senior Science Fellow, American Meteorological Society
Speakers:
- Dr. Judith Lean, Senior Scientist for Sun-Earth System Research, Space Science Division, Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, DC
- Dr. Caspar Ammann, Research Scientist, Climate and Global Dynamics Division, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO
Program Summary
Separating Solar and Anthropogenic (Greenhouse Gas-Related) Climate Impacts
During the past three decades a suite of space-based instruments has monitored the Sun’s brightness as well as the Earth’s surface and atmospheric temperatures. These datasets enable the separation of climate’s responses to solar activity from other sources of climate variability (anthropogenic greenhouse gases, El Niño Southern Oscillation, volcanic aerosols). The empirical evidence indicates that the solar irradiance 11-year cycle increase of 0.1% produces a global surface temperature increase of about 0.1 K with larger increases at higher altitudes. Historical solar brightness changes are estimated by modeling the contemporary irradiance changes in terms of their solar magnetic sources (dark sunspots and bright faculae) in conjunction with simulated long-term evolution of solar magnetism. In this way, the solar irradiance increase since the seventeenth century Maunder Minimum is estimated to be slightly larger than the increase in recent solar activity cycles, and smaller than early estimates that were based on variations in Sun-like stars and cosmogenic isotopes. Ongoing studies are beginning to decipher the empirical Sun- climate connections as a combination of responses to direct solar heating of the surface and lower atmosphere, and indirect heating via solar UV irradiance impacts on the ozone layer and middle atmosphere, with subsequent communication to the surface and climate. The associated physical pathways appear to involve the modulation of existing dynamical and circulation atmosphere-ocean couplings, including the El Nino Southern Oscillation (El Nino/La Nina cycles) and the Quasi-Biennial Oscillation . Comparisons of the empirical results with model simulations suggest that models are presently deficient in accounting for these pathways.
The Sun’s Role in Past, Current and Future Climate Change
Correlations of instrumental or reconstructed climate time series with indices of solar activity are often being used to suggest that the climate system is tightly coupled to the sun. Yet correlations have to be used with caution because they are not necessarily synonymous with cause-and-effect relationships. Therefore, it is critical to understand the physical mechanisms that are responsible for the signals. Independent tests can then be applied to validate or reject a hypothesized link. Spatial structures that are related to the processes that translate the solar influence into a climatic response can serve as such a test. A particularly powerful example is obtained by looking at the vertical extent of the solar signal in the atmosphere. While the 11-year solar cycle can be found and the signal is consistent with the expected physical response throughout the atmospheric column, the underlying trends in temperature, however, are inconsistent with increased solar activity. These differences in trends correspond to the response to an increase in atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations.
Another way of evaluating the consistency of a sun-climate relationship can be gained from extending the time scale from the most recent solar cycles back over the instrumental period and further into the historical past. However, solar forcing is not the only factor affecting climate, and thus other influences should not be neglected. Examples of the danger of over-interpretation of a purported solar link arising from superposition of multiple forcings are the famous Maunder Minimum (a period in the second half of the 17th and the early 18th Century when hardly any sunspots appeared on the solar surface), and the early 20th century where a general but small increase in solar activity coincided with changes in greenhouse gas concentration. The sun probably played some role in both of these cases, but the occurrence or absence of volcanic eruptions and other influences might have been just as important.
Nevertheless, climate reconstructions suggest that a small, but persistent, climate response to solar variability exists on the global/hemispheric scale as well as in some regions. Solar forcing and volcanic activity appear to have driven the majority of global/hemispheric climate variations over the past Centuries. But from about the mid-20th Century onward, the sum of these natural factors is no longer consistent with the observed warming. Only anthropogenic forcings, such as greenhouse gas increases and emissions of aerosol particles, can explain the observed temperature record. This explanation is even stronger when the vertical structure of the trends is included in the explanation. Therefore, one can also predict that future natural solar variations will most likely be insufficient to counter the changes that we can anticipate from future increases in greenhouse gas concentrations.
Biographies
Dr. Judith Lean is Senior Scientist for Sun-Earth System Research in the Space Science Division of the Naval Research Laboratory in Washington, DC. She has served on a variety of NASA, NSF, NOAA and NRC advisory committees, including as Chair of the National Research Council (NRC) Working Group on Solar Influences on Global Change and, most recently, the NRC Committee on a Strategy to Mitigate the Impact of Sensor De-scopes and De-manifests on the NPOESS and GOES-R Spacecraft. A member of the AGU, IAGA, AAS/SPD and AMS, she was inducted as a Fellow of the American Geophysical Union in 2002 and a member of US National Academy of Sciences in 2003. She is the recipient of a number of NASA research grants, in collaboration with other SSD and US scientists, and is currently a Co Investigator on the SORCE, TIMED/SEE, SDO/EVE and GLORY/TIM space missions. A US citizen since 1992, she has a Ph.D. in Atmospheric Physics, 1982, from the University of Adelaide, Australia and B.S. (with Honors) from the Australian National University (1975). The focus of her research is the Sun’s variability and its impact on the Earth system, including climate change and space weather. She has published over 100 peer-reviewed papers in journals and books, and delivered over 250 presentations documenting her research.
Dr. Caspar Ammann is a research scientist, in the Climate and Global Dynamics Division of the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado. He has a M.S. degree in Geography and Geology from the University of Bern, Switzerland and a Ph.D. in Geosciences from the University of Massachusetts. His primary research is focused on the climate of past centuries and millennia, and how the current changes compare to this natural background. He has reconstructed past climates as well as volcanic forcing from proxy (e.g., ice cores, corals etc..) records and then simulated climate variability and response to forcings in state-of-the-art coupled Atmosphere-Ocean-General Circulation Models. Currently, Dr. Ammann’s research awards include an National Science Foundation Collaborations in Math- and Geosciences multi-institution program award to develop new Bayesian Hierarchical Models to reconstruct climate from proxies with different resolution and uncertainties and a project to improve regional impact studies based on better representation of forced, natural climate variations. He is a collaborator in several efforts to understand the effects of natural forcings on past Arctic climate and to improve model representation of the external forcing from the sun and volcanoes. He is also the organizer of the IGBP-PAGES Paleoclimate Reconstruction (PR) Challenge to assess spatial reconstruction methods and a member of the NASA Living with a Star, Targeted Research & Technology Scientific Steering Committee. Dr. Ammann has authored or co-authored more than 30 peer-reviewed articles in scientific journals and books, and made over 200 scientific presentations to peer-scientific, professional and student, as well as public audiences.
Earlier this week Alexandra Kougentakis, Fellows Assistant at the Center for American Progress, attended one of the American Meteorological Society’s seminars discussing the latest in climate science (which are great resources for policymakers, as they tend to take place on Capitol Hill). She has reported on the event for Climate Progress:
One of the favorite, though well-debunked, claims of the global warming skeptics is that the recent warming is due to the recent up tick in solar activity. The current solar cycle has indeed seen higher-than-average sunspots, but what most strengthens skeptics’ argument is the lack of knowledge about what this means. In that light, the American Meteorological Society’s recent seminar, – Solar Radiation, Cosmic Rays and Greenhouse Gases: What’s Driving Global Warming? – was especially illuminating
One of the strongest arguments against attempts to link solar activity to current warming has to do with inconsistencies in the solar signal.
As climate scientist Dr. Caspar Ammann pointed out at the AMS seminar, the atmosphere is divided into different layers between which the impacts of ozone of pollution vary. While the models to predict the layers’ temperatures are not yet perfect, it is understood that solar irradiance would warm both the troposphere, the layer closest to the earth, and the stratosphere, the next outer layer. The warming that the troposphere is experiencing now is accompanied by a cooling of the stratosphere, which signifies that the current flux in solar irradiance is not a complete explanation for current climate shifts.
Climate experts widely recognize that the sun is a minor player at best in the current warming trend, and this is due in part to the scope of its impact seen in the past. At the AMS seminar, solar physicist Dr. Judith Lean further made the point that it is not realistic to separate anthropogenic and solar effects of warming since they are occurring simultaneously.
There are a lot of different factors affecting climate, some natural, some anthropogenic, and likely some that haven’t been clearly identified yet. The interaction between these factors makes it difficult to establish a linear connection between temperatures and a single variable. Addressing the specific argument of the skeptics, however, the solar-climate connection alone cannot account for the level of warming that has occurred since the mid-20th century.
The major take-home message of the AMS seminar, highlighted by both Dr. Lean and Dr. Ammann, was that both the empirical record and modeling demonstrates that current warming trends are most directly explained by anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions, more than any other factor. This will probably do little to silence the ranting of global warming skeptics, but it is important to understand that it is only too convenient to blame nature for the problems that we bring upon ourselves.
Boxer Requests Hearing with Interior Secretary over Polar Bear Delays
On Thursday March 20, Sen. Boxer (D-Calif.), chair of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, sent a letter to Secretary of the Interior Dirk Kempthorne asking him “to appear before the Committee as soon as possible for an oversight hearing” on the “considerable delays in taking final action” over the Endangered Species Act listing of the polar bear. Boxer told him that the hearing would be planned for April 2 or 8.
The following day, Lyle Laverty, Assistant Secretary for Fish, Wildlife, and Parks, faxed back a response at 5:56 PM saying:I understand Secretary Kempthorne called you on March 17, 2008, and expressed his commitment to testify before the Committee on the polar bear proposal once a decision is made on the issue. I also understand the Secretary committed to calling you on Tuesday, April 1, 2008, with an update on the progress towards a decision.
Boxer immediately responded, calling the offer of a telephone briefing and a hearing after a decision has been made “wholly inadequate,” and again requested the April 2 or 8 date for a hearing discussing “this serious breach of the Department’s duty to follow the law.”
It has been nearly a month since FWS director Dale Hall stated in a House Appropriations Committee hearing that he had submitted his decision on the polar bear listing to Secretary Kempthorne.
Water Availability: A Matter of Quantity, Quality, and Use
Rep. Grace Napolitano (D-Calif.), chairwoman of the House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Water and Power, the Environmental and Energy Study Institute (EESI), and the Water Environment Federation (WEF) invite you to a briefing to examine the factors that limit the water available for critical uses throughout the country. The briefing is held in cooperation with the U.S. Geological Survey’s National Water-Quality Assessment (NAWQA) Program.
Competition for water is becoming more intense across the United States. Population growth competes in many areas with demands for water for irrigation and power production. Aquatic ecosystems compete for water used by cities, farms, and power plants to support their minimum flow requirements. In addition, the depletion of water in many aquifers decreases the supply of good quality surface water, and climate change is likely to exacerbate the availability of water as well.
Water quality impaired by human activities constrains water use. Perhaps less understood is that water use can degrade water quality by releasing naturally occurring contaminants, like salts, uranium and radium, into streams and aquifers, thereby constraining water availability.
This briefing will explain and provide examples of the connections between water use and water quality and how they can ultimately affect water availability for critical uses. It will begin by highlighting salinity in the Southwest, where a new USGS study has found reduced concentrations of salts in streams resulting from control activities in irrigated agricultural areas. It also will provide brief examples of how agricultural practices have affected naturally occurring radium in New Jersey, pumping has affected naturally occurring uranium in San Joaquin public-supply wells, and water re-use has introduced man-made organic compounds in coastal aquifers in southern California.
To conclude, the briefing also will connect the science to national policies relating to issues of water availability.
Speakers include:
- David Anning, NAWQA scientist, Albuquerque, New Mexico, U.S. Geological Survey
- David Kanzer, Senior Water Resource Engineer,Colorado River Water Conservation District
- Robert Hirsch, Associate Director for Water, U.S. Geological Survey
- Claudia Copeland, Specialist in Resource and Environmental Policy, Congressional Research Service
This briefing is free and open to the public. No RSVP is required. Please forward this notice to others who may be interested. For more information, contact Leanne Lamusga, [email protected], 202-662-1884.
Summit on America's Energy Future
This event will feature presentations by leading thinkers on energy policy from the U.S. government (state and federal), universities, and the private sector, as well as international perspectives. It will take place in the main auditorium of the National Academy of Sciences building at 2100 C Street, NW, in Washington DC. This event will serve to develop information for the Academies’ ongoing study, America’s Energy Future: Technology Opportunities, Risks and Tradeoffs, and to stimulate discussion among leading thinkers with diverse points of view on energy issues as the 2008 U.S. elections approach.
The Summit will include presentations addressing three major energy themes: Energy Security; Energy and the Economy; and Energy and the Environment. During the sessions, the analyses and results of key recent energy studies will be presented by principals from:
- Council on Foreign Relations
- Electric Power Research Institute
- InterAcademy Council
- International Energy Agency
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology
- McKinsey Global Institute
- National Commission on Energy Policy
- National Petroleum Council
- National Research Council
- Rocky Mountain Institute
- U.S. Climate Change Science and Technology Program
- U.S. Department of Energy
In each session, there will also be time provided for participants to ask questions to a roundtable of speakers. The preliminary agenda will be posted by mid-January. This event is expected to be very full – please register early (free) if you’d like to attend. If you have any questions, please contact us at energysummit at nas.edu.
Thursday, March 13, Auditorium, National Academy of Sciences Building
| 8:00-8:15 a.m. | Welcome and Introduction Ralph Cicerone, President, National Academy of Sciences (confirmed) |
| 8:15-9:45 a.m. | Current U.S. Energy Policy Context Sen. Jeff Bingaman, Chair, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, U.S. Senate (invited) The Geopolitical Context of America’s Energy Future Raymond L. Orbach, Undersecretary for Science, U.S. Department of Energy (invited) The Geopolitics of Energy Fatih Birol, Chief Economist, International Energy Agency (confirmed) |
| 9:45-10:00 a.m. | Question and Answer Forum Moderator: Ralph Cicerone |
| 10:30-10:45 a.m. | Defining the Problems Robert W. Fri, Senior Fellow Emeritus, Resources for the Future (confirmed) |
| 10:45-11:15 a.m. | Reference Global Energy and Environment Projections Ged Davis, Managing Director, World Economic Forum Centre for Strategic Insight, and Co-Chair, Global Energy Assessment Council, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (confirmed) |
| 1:15-11:45 a.m. | Facing the Hard Truths about Energy Lee F. Raymond, Chair, National Petroleum Council (invited) |
| 11:45 a.m. – noon | Question and Answer Forum Moderator: Robert W. Fri |
|
Session 1 1:30-1:45 p.m. |
Introduction to Session 1 Harold T. Shapiro, President Emeritus, Princeton University and Chair, National Research Council Committee on America’s Energy Future (confirmed) |
| 1:45-2:30 p.m. |
The Future of Coal and Nuclear Power Ernest J. Moniz, Professor, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Co-Chair, MIT Interdisciplinary Study on the Future of Nuclear Power (confirmed) |
| 2:30-3:00 |
Biofuels: How Much, How Fast, and How Difficult? Jose Goldemberg, Secretary for the Environment, State of São Paulo, Brazil and Co-chair, Global Energy Assessment Council, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (confirmed) |
| 3:30-4:00 p.m. |
Automotive Fuel Economy: How Far Should We Go? Paul R. Portney, Dean, Eller College of Management, University of Arizona and Chair, National Research Council Committee on Effectiveness and Impact of Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards (confirmed) |
| 4:00-4:30 p.m. |
Prospects of a Hydrogen Economy Michael P. Ramage, Executive VP, ExxonMobil Research and Engineering Co. (Retired), and Chair, National Research Council Committee on Alternatives and Strategies for Future Hydrogen Production and Use (confirmed) |
| 4:30-5:15 p.m. |
Closing Address Samuel W. Bodman, Secretary, U.S. Department of Energy (confirmed) Moderator: Harold Shapiro |
| 5:15-6:30 p.m. | Reception: Great Hall, National Academy of Sciences Building |
| Friday, March 14, Auditorium, National Academy of Sciences Building | |
|
Session 2 9:00-9:15 a.m. |
Introduction to Session 2 Charles M. Vest, President, National Academy of Engineering (confirmed) |
| 9:15-10:00 a.m. |
Ending the Energy Stalemate John P. Holdren, Professor, Harvard University and Co-Chair, National Commission on Energy Policy (confirmed) |
| 10:00-10:30 a.m. |
Google’s RechargeIT Program for Commercial Deployment of Plug-in Hybrid Vehicles Dan W. Reicher, Director, Climate Change and Energy Initiatives, Google.org (invited) |
| 11:00-11:30 a.m. |
Electricity Innovation Pathways Steven R. Specker, President, Electric Power Research Institute (confirmed) |
| 11:30 a.m.-noon |
Session 2 Question and Answer Forum Moderator: Charles M. Vest |
|
Session 3 1:15-1:30 p.m. |
Introduction to Session 3 Richard A. Meserve, President, Carnegie Institution for Science (confirmed) |
| 1:30-2:00 p.m. |
Lighting the Way: Toward a Sustainable Energy Future Steven Chu, Director, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, and Co-Chair, Interacademy Council Study Panel on a Sustainable Energy Future (confirmed) |
| 2:00-2:30 p.m. |
Global CO2 Reduction Supply Curve Matt Rogers, Director, McKinsey and Co. (invited) |
| 3:00-3:30 p.m. |
Winning the Oil End Game Amory Lovins, CEO, Rocky Mountain Institute, and Principal Investigator, Winning the Oil End Game (confirmed) |
| 3:30-4:00 p.m. |
Climate Change Technologies Robert Marlay, Deputy Director, Climate Change Technology Program, U.S. Department of Energy (confirmed) |
| 4:00-4:30 p.m. |
Session 3 Question and Answer Forum Moderator: Richard Meserve |
| 4:30 p.m. |
Closing Remarks and Adjourn Robert Fri |
FY 2009 Basic Research Budget
The Committee will explore the importance of basic research to U.S. competitiveness. The hearing will examine research and development budgets at agencies in the Committee’s jurisdiction, particularly the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and the National Science Foundation (NSF), as well as interagency science programs addressing climate change, nanotechnology, and information technology.
Ecological Dimensions of Biofuels
- sustainable development and use of biofuels;
- social, biogeographic, land use, and biodiversity considerations; and,
- ecological dimensions of alternatives for crop selection and production, harvest and transport of product to refinery, and refining of liquid fuels and other co-products.
A keynote address will be delivered by Dr. Jose Goldemberg, Co-President of the Global Energy Assessment (GEA) Council and Professor at the Universidade de Sao Paulo. Goldemberg recently served as Secretary for the Environment of the State of Sao Paulo, Brazil, and was a lead author of the World Energy Assessment.
The conference will conclude with an evening social featuring additional poster presentations and opportunities for attendees to network with presenters and others working in this important field.
Full details, including an agenda, confirmed speakers, registration information, and sponsorship opportunities, are available at http://www.esa.org/biofuels.
Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center
| Time | Topic | Speaker |
|---|---|---|
| 8:30 am | “Environmental Impact of Biofuels Cropping Systems: Introduction”” | Bill Parton Colorado State University |
| 9:00 am | “Defining Sustainable Biofuels – or, “It isn’t Easy Being Green”” | John Sheehan LiveFuels, Inc. |
| 9:30 am | “Field to Fuel – Developing Sustainable Biorefineries” | Robin Jenkins Dupont Central Research and Development Experiment Station |
| 10:00 am | BREAK | |
| 10:30 am | “Biofuels and Water Quality in the Midwest: Corn vs. Switchgrass as Feedstocks” | Catherine Kling Iowa State University |
| 11:00 am | “The Biogeochemistry of Bioenergy Landscapes: Clean Water, Clean Air, & Climate Mitigation vs. Business as Usual” | Philip Robertson Michigan State University |
| 11:30 am | “Interactions between Biofuel Choices and Landscape Dynamics and Land use” | Virginia Dale Oak Ridge National Laboratory |
| 12:00 pm | Keynote Address (with lunch) “Environmental and Ecological Dimensions of Biofuels” | Jose Goldemberg Global Energy Assessment Council & Universidade de Sao Paulo, Brasil |
| 1:30 pm | “Biofuels and Biodiversity” | John Wiens The Nature Conservancy |
| 2:00 pm | “Production of Biofuels Feedstock on Agriculture Land and Grasslands” | Wally Wilhelm U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service |
| 2:30 pm | “Are Rangeland Biofuel Feedstocks Ecologically Sustainable?” | Linda Wallace University of Oklahoma |
| 3:00 pm | “Sustainable Biofuels and Bioproducts from our Forests” | Marilyn Buford U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service |
| 3:30 pm | BREAK | |
| 4:00 pm | “Municipal Solid Waste as Supplemental Feedstocks” | Donna Perla U.S. Environmental Protection Agency |
| 4:30 pm | ” A Global-Scale Biofuels Program and its Environmental Consequences” | Jerry Melillo The Ecosystems Center, Marine Biological Laboratory |
| 5:00 pm | “The Rush to Biofuels and Ecological Perspectives in the Policy Process” | Otto Doering Purdue University |
| 5:30 pm | Poster Social & Reception |
Interior Holding Back Polar Bear Decision; CBD Sues Over Penguins
At last week’s House Appropriations hearing on the FY 2009 Fish and Wildlife Service budget, FWS chief Dale Hall was grilled on the service’s implementation of the Endangered Species Act. The Bush administration has listed dramatically fewer species than previous administrations after dramatically reinterpreting the Act under Secretary Gale Norton’s “New Environmentalism” initiative to limit its protections for critical habitats. Further, Deputy Secretary Julie MacDonald was found to have interfered with a series of listing decisions (such as the prairie dog and sage grouse) until her dismissal in 2006.
Hall stated that he finally submitted his decision on the endangerment of polar bears due to climate change to Dirk Kempthorne, the Secretary of the Interior, saying that he expected a final decision to come in a few weeks. Hall justified the further delay to reporters: “It needs to be reviewed and explained to Interior, it can take a while to understand.”
On February 27, the Center for Biological Diversity announced a lawsuit protesting the FWS’s illegal delay on considering the endangerment of ten species of penguins:The legal deadline at issue in today’s suit was triggered by a scientific petition the Center filed in November 2006 seeking Endangered Species Act protection for many of the world’s most threatened penguin species, including the emperor penguin in Antarctica. In July 2007, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service took the first of the three steps in the listing process when it found that 10 penguin species may deserve protection and began status reviews for those species. The Fish and Wildlife Service’s finding for the 10 penguin species triggered the duty to decide by November 29, 2007, whether the penguins qualify for listing under the Endangered Species Act, and if so, to propose them for listing. That decision is now more than two months overdue.
DSCOVR Climate Satellite Still in Limbo
NASA was given over $100 million in taxpayers money to build the Deep Space Climate Observatory (DSCOVR), a spacecraft designed to measure the energy budget of our warming planet from the unique vantage of a million miles away.Even though it is fully completed over five years ago, DSCOVR is still sitting in a box at the Goddard Space Center – likely for political reasons.
In 2006, Anderson filed a FOIA request with NASA, receiving only letters from scientists to NASA concerned about the cancellation, but no documents about the internal decision-making process.
In 2007, NOAA proposed a joint NASA-NOAA mission with the private launch company Space Services Inc. using the DSCOVR satellite.
Anderson now reports on his 2007 FOIA request to NOAA on the fate of DSCOVR:My request was sent in November. I was told my documents would be emailed on December 11. Then I got call from NOAA General Counsel Hugh Schratwieser before Christmas telling me that it going to take longer than they thought but I should get the document package in early January. Mr. Schratwieser also assured me NOAA takes pride in their compliance with the Freedom of Information Act and that I shouldn’t worry.Then silence.
I have since sent five unanswered emails to NOAA requesting updates on my request. Government bodies like NOAA have a legal obligation to respond to FOIA requests in 20 working days. It is now over three times that long and counting.
Since I was repeatedly told over the last two months that the package of documents was very close to being assembled, I can only assume that it is now complete but being held up for political reasons.